September 16, 1921] 



SCIENCE 



251 



the literature on both, sides and then visited 

 practically all the laboratories from the Mayos' 

 at Eochester, Minnesota, to the eastern sea- 

 board. He visited especially the Rockefeller 

 Institute several times, also a number of Euro- 

 pean laboratories. He became thoroughly con- 

 vinced (1) that the experiments were not 

 cruel, (2) that the statements in the litera- 

 ture of the antivivisectionists were often 

 garbled and utterly misleading, and (3) 

 that the results to animals themselves as well 

 as to human beings were of enormous benefit. 

 Then he wrote the article, and Miss Lane, 

 the editor of the Companion, bravely printed 

 it. 



The especial significance of his writing such 

 an article lies in his nation-wide reputation 

 as a lover of animals and their protector. He 

 is the father of all the bird-refuges in the 

 United States. His lectures on animals have 

 been heard everywhere, and when he approves 

 of experiments on animals every one knows 

 that he has good reasons for so doing. 



The fury of the antivivisectionists at once 

 rose to fever heat. The 'New York Antivivi- 

 section Society through its president, Mrs. 

 Belais, sent out an extraordinary appeal call- 

 ing him " one Ernest Harold Baynes " — al- 

 most as if one should write " one Herbert 

 Hoover " ! In a paragraph all in capitals 

 Mrs. Belais called on all lovers of animals to 

 help crush Miss Lane financially not only by 

 cancelling their own subscriptions but by urg- 

 ing all their friends to do the same — a nation- 

 wide boycott. This extraordinary method 

 will ensure a reaction in favor of Miss Lane 

 because of its vindictive imfairness. It is not 

 argument, it is persecution and is also illegal. 



It behooves the friend of scientific research 

 and real lovers of animals to support Miss 

 Lane by expressing to her by mail their ad- 

 miration of her courage, and by adding their 

 own names to the list of her subscribers. Her 

 address is 381 4th Ave., INew York, and the 

 cost of a year's subscription is only two dol- 

 lars. She has received hundreds of letters 

 from the A-Vs — many abusive. The ISTovem- 

 ber and succeeding issues will contain some 

 interesting reading. 



Mr. Baynes has also been attacked by mail 

 and by cancellation of engagements. It is up 

 to us to sustain so doughty a champion. He 

 has given the antivivisectionists the hardest 

 blow I have known in 40 years. 



W. W. Keen 



QUOTATIONS 



CHEMISTRY AND THE PUBLIC 



It is fitting that 3,000 British, Canadian, 

 and American chemists should be sitting to- 

 gether at Columbia University, for they have 

 been acting together for seven years. The 

 chief feature of American chemical history 

 after 1914 was the remarkable cooperation of 

 American and Allied — especially British — 

 chemists upon problems pertaining to muni- 

 tions and other war essentials. They found 

 themselves faced by a Germany which had 

 built up its chemical industries by decades of 

 shrewd effort. As Mr. Garvan said on 

 Wednesday, the Germans had taken the dis- 

 coveries of the British chemist Perkin — the 

 Perkin Medal is one of our most prized scien- 

 tific awards — and had made it the basis for 

 a chemical technology unapproached else- 

 where. Happily, we were able to build up 

 some branches of industrial, agricultural, and 

 electrical chemistry with a speed that sur- 

 prised those who were unacquainted with our 

 resourcefulness and our skill in research. By 

 the end of 1915 the United States had the 

 largest aniline plant in the world and was 

 credited with nitric acid and nitro-cellulose 

 plants three times greater than any others. 



Not since Syracuse waited for the inven- 

 tions of Archimedes to beat off the Romans 

 has attention been concentrated upon sci- 

 ence in war-time as Americans concentrated 

 it upon chemistry after 1917. We had been 

 shocked into a realization that we had depend- 

 ed upon Germany for medicines and dyes; 

 that we had developed no independent potash 

 resources; that we had done little with our 

 Louisana sulphur ; that we had looked to Chile 

 for nitrates which we should have manu- 

 factured in part for ourselves, and that we 

 had wasted the precious by-products we might 



